Home
Search
Login
RegisterPosted by: rp
« on: August 12, 2024, 02:11:50 am »https://x.com/Rjrasva/status/1813891131157225921?t=LwxtZSRuavs6pbtZJg9Spw&s=19
https://x.com/Rjrasva/status/1813891946873819339?t=BLmYYSqp7N2SlcrgpTKcsA&s=19
https://x.com/Rjrasva/status/1813893050588098972?t=co3ZSovzQelNxEC380hMog&s=19
Quote
Laughable, the more technological sophistication the more material throughput needed & less left for other species & all day they r kanging about tech ("Faustian man...")
Avg Malawian needs 0.3 hectares, avg American needs 8
https://www.deborahjones.ca/journalism/reporting/bill-reess-big-shoes-ecological-footprint-inventor/…
LatestQuotewignats genuinely believe they care abt animals more than others lol
https://x.com/Rjrasva/status/1813891946873819339?t=BLmYYSqp7N2SlcrgpTKcsA&s=19
Quote
example of this is AI which burns through coal & gas in days which needed nature millions of years to form
or the junk EV's the scam artist owner of this app sells & whose material needs result in:
How humans are exploiting the oceans
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kfAdgCTF9k
San bushmen don't
https://x.com/Rjrasva/status/1813893050588098972?t=co3ZSovzQelNxEC380hMog&s=19
Quote
need to mine & pollute the depths of the ocean to maintain themselves
People who pride themselves on being modern, boasting about consumption (e. g. "Europoors don't have dryers & air dry clothes unlike in land of the free"), fantasizing that they r colonizing Mars definitely do
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: July 31, 2024, 07:47:14 pm »Our enemies complain that the True Left message is increasingly mainstreaming:
https://www.eurocanadians.ca/2024/07/indigenous-nationalism-in-the-guise-of-environmental-stewardship
Actually, I would blame organic chemistry even more than any of the above. In absence of organic chemistry, all the above could have happened and the effect on the environment would have been many orders of magnitude less. But by no coincidence organic chemistry came from the same civilization that all of the above came from, so at least the correct civilization is being blamed.
This was my plan all along.
But how do our enemies respond?
Israelis say the same thing about Israel.
Since this is an environmentalism topic, I will conclude with a graph:
Homework: from an environmentalist perspective, who should get all the land?
https://www.eurocanadians.ca/2024/07/indigenous-nationalism-in-the-guise-of-environmental-stewardship
Quote
Second paragraph:
QuoteWe are often too quick to place the blame for worsening planetary conditions solely at the feet of specific bad actors such as politicians, political parties, corporations, and CEOs who have been corrupted by greed and self-interest.
Note how he places the vague concept of “self interest” in the category of being something associated with “bad actors” and corruption. As I noted to the readers in my last article, I am neither a libertarian nor an Objectivist – but I do not believe that acting in what one perceives to be one’s own self-interest to be villainous, even if it is short-sighted.
Note his insinuation that what is needed is a “good actor”, who is not “corrupted by greed and self interest” – in other words, an invulnerable arbiter whose rulings are binding and must be taken as articles of faith.
He moves on to his metapolitical philosophy as to what led to Canada’s supposed contemporary enviro catastrophic state.
Quotewhile I acknowledge that bad actors certainly do exist, and that corruption is likely a factor, I feel that by focusing [sic] too heavily on individual failings, we risk misdirecting our attention away from the systems which allow these bad actors to have such an outsized impact on our environment in the first place.
A prescient reader may correctly guess from this sentence that the author is going to go on to attack “Eurocentric” socio-political structures. Unsettling, but in this year of 2777 A.U.C., is not surprising.Quotemany of our environmental issues have their roots in Europe beginning in the 1600s and are a product of private property law, the enclosure of the commons, and settler colonialism which exported this suite of ideologies across the globe.
Anybody who didn’t see that coming, do a cartwheel.
Actually, I would blame organic chemistry even more than any of the above. In absence of organic chemistry, all the above could have happened and the effect on the environment would have been many orders of magnitude less. But by no coincidence organic chemistry came from the same civilization that all of the above came from, so at least the correct civilization is being blamed.
Quote
QuoteThe process of European settlement in the so called “New World” occurred through genocide, dispossession, and displacement of Indigenous Peoples across Turtle Island. The imposition of colonial laws and ideas of private property – now upheld by the settler-state of Canada – created the conditions for capitalism to flourish as land was carved up and privatized at the expense of Indigenous lives and their traditions....
The appearance of anti-Zionist encampments on the campuses of our major universities, whose activists exhibit cognitive dissonance in their taking public funds from us “settlers” with one hand, while disparaging us with the other hand, has not gone unnoticed by those who would have been considered “normies” a couple of years ago. The growing harmonisation of the anti-Zionists with the anti European anti-colonialists should be a cause for alarm in this country, especially when their beliefs are promoted in what had heretofore been seen as neutral and respected publications of record.
This was my plan all along.
But how do our enemies respond?
Quote
To conclude, I would like to make a lands acknowledgement:
I would like to acknowledge that I am on the traditional land of the Prairie-Canadian peoples, who faced poverty, loneliness, bewilderment, and a harsh climate to bring the rule of law to this land; for the right to live in peace and prosperity with their neighbours; who provided crops and livestock the world needed to live.
This is my home.
Israelis say the same thing about Israel.
Since this is an environmentalism topic, I will conclude with a graph:
Homework: from an environmentalist perspective, who should get all the land?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: July 10, 2024, 02:49:45 am »Only in Western civilization:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOezW-b_mD8
How about not creating the previously nonexistent problems in the first place? But I guess that would be too non-Western for Westerners to accept.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOezW-b_mD8
Quote
to solve the problems it creates
How about not creating the previously nonexistent problems in the first place? But I guess that would be too non-Western for Westerners to accept.
Posted by: antihellenistic
« on: June 28, 2024, 09:30:10 pm »Quote
It is a characteristic of our materialistic epoch that our scientific education shows a growing emphasis on what is real and practical: such subjects, for instance, as applied mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. Of course they are necessary in an age that is dominated by industrial technology and chemistry, and where everyday life shows at least the external manifestations of these. But it is a perilous thing to base the general culture of a nation on the knowledge of these subjects. On the contrary, that general culture ought always to be directed towards ideals. - Adolf Hitler
Sumber :
Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf" (Part 2) page 41 - 42
https://archive.org/details/AdolfHitlersmeinKampfpart2/page/n41/mode/2up
Quote
“Industrialization has deprived the individual of all liberty, placed him in thrall to capital and the machine. The state is not the organization for self-rule by free individuals who call themselves citizens, but the central organization for the mills of labor growing out of industrialization, in which any indepen¬ dence or individualism is ground to dust. This is most crudely evident in the Bolshevik state, with its state capitalism.
“But if we realize our social economy exactly as we discussed more than once, we will come to liberate the individual from the domination of capital and all its institutions. To begin with, labor will seize possession of capital. But what is ethically most significant is the following: when the purchasing power of wages increases—when, as you say, it might even double—the initial effect will be that production will have to increase, since the demand will be greater. But next comes the great era ofincreasing personal gratification, with the result that the worker will still earn a sufficiency if, instead of working eight hours a day, he puts in only seven or even six.
“This moment signifies the rebirth of individuality, of the possibility of living for oneself outside the hours that serve material needs, and of devoting oneself to hobbies, cultural interests, art, science, life in general, and the family.
“To this extent, then, socialism—our socialism—leads back to individuality, and with it to the strongest impetus to a personal, racially defined, and altogether universal human evolution.”
...
“The World War had as one of its consequences that, wherever capitalism reigns, America has supremacy. And since America suffers from industrial overproduction, it will exploit this supremacy to dispose of its overproduction. That concerns everyone—Germany as well as France, England as well as South America, China, and Japan. Only where capitalism has been broken, abolished, replaced by something new does America’s power stop.
“Herein lies our greatest mission and at the same time our best chance! Here is the bedrock where we may cast anchor. From there an anti-industrial world can be erected.” - Adolf Hitler
Source :
Hitler - Memoirs Of A Confidant by Otto Wagener page 148, 149, 160
https://archive.org/details/wagenerhitlermemoirsofaconfidant/page/n177/mode/2up
Quote
As far as possible, one must avoid ruining landscapes with networks of high-tension wires, telpher railways and machines of that sort. I'm in favour of roads, when needs must—but what's uglier than a funicular? - Adolf Hitler, 9th February 1942, midday SPECIAL GUEST: SPEER The farce of gas-masks—The economics of the cults— Obersalzberg.
Source :
Hitler, Adolf – Table Talk page 306
Type of people who ever spread industrialization and materialist way of life in the first place
Western Civilization is responsible for obstacles to the environmentalist ideal society
Quote
The beginning of Europe’s ascendancy has been dated from many points: the Industrial Revolution, the modern world capitalist system, the Renaissance. There is a strong consensus that the rise of Europe should be sought no earlier than the Middle Ages, although some still connect it back to Athens. For Hegel, however, the question was less Europe’s ascendancy than its uniqueness, which he attributed to its autonomous capacity for free reflection, a capacity which, in his view, had descended from the Greeks, and which therefore required for its explanation a consideration of the origins of Greek uniqueness.
To this day no one knows how to account for the origins of the “Greek miracle”. In stark contrast to the numerous explanations which have been offered on all the other major revolutionary transformations of Europe, no strong or consensual argument has yet been produced in response to why ancient Greece “discovered the mind,” discovered the method of causal science, invented the literary form of tragedy, prose writing, and tapped into the progressive spirit of critical reason. Many classicists have offered no more than tautological explanations in which the explanandum reappears in the explanans: “Greek philosophy grew out of an exclusive national culture and is the legitimate offspring of the Greek spirit” (Windelband 1956: 3); “Greek philosophy has a good claim to be regarded as the most original and influential achievement of the Greek genius” (Luce 1992: 9).
Source :
The Uniqueness of Western Civilization Ricardo Duchesne page 312 - 315
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: June 08, 2024, 06:03:08 pm »I have been warning year after year against progressive environmentalism (ie. believing that problems created by Western civilization can be solved by more Western civilization). Of course the progressives did not listen and continued believing EVs were the answer. Now:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/major-lithium-discovery-fracking-wastewater-080028818.html
I, on the other hand, can continue to oppose fracking (which should indeed be opposed) because I have never supported EVs but have instead always advocated returning to bicycles (which are also many times lighter (and hence require less energy to move around, duh!) than cars, whereas EVs are actually heavier than petrol/diesel cars on average:
). This is why only regressive environmentalism deserves to be taken seriously.
It is no coincidence that the one and only one civilization in all of world history which discovered lithium:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#History
is the same one and only one civilization in world history which invented fracking:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fracking#History
The environment was in incomparably better condition prior to the discovery of lithium. So why would anyone think that lithium would be needed to counter environmental degradation? (Answer: because they are Westerners.)
More generally, the environment was in incomparably better condition prior to the Renaissance. So why would anyone think that any post-Renaissance knowledge would be needed to counter environmental degradation? (Answer: because they are Westerners.)
Homework: since the environment was in incomparably better condition back when there were 0 Western scientists in existence, what is the correct number of Western scientists that should exist in the future if we want to save the environment? (Bonus question: what is the fastest way to reach this number?)
Bacl to the first link, at least there are a few regressive environmentalists ridiculing progressive enviromentalists in the comments, for example:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/major-lithium-discovery-fracking-wastewater-080028818.html
Quote
Major lithium discovery in fracking wastewater leaves the left facing EV 'irony'
...
The discovery of the potential for thousands of tons of lithium to be extracted annually from wastewater generated by fracking in the Marcellus Shale leaves proponents of a green energy future at a crossroads, Republicans said Thursday.
A University of Pittsburgh study suggested processing byproducts from natural gas production in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale basin could potentially meet nearly half of U.S. lithium needs. The typical electric vehicle (EV) requires nearly 18 pounds of lithium to power its battery. That figure grows exponentially for Teslas, according to reports.
...
"Now nearly 40% of our nation’s domestic need for lithium can be found right here as a byproduct of fracking," he said. "I fully expect every single Democrat to join Republicans in supporting domestic natural gas development."
...
"The great irony is the same climate extremists who oppose harvesting fossil fuels under all circumstances are dependent on lithium for solar panels and for the battery components they need for things like electric cars, which often are powered on electricity generated by natural gas," he said.
I, on the other hand, can continue to oppose fracking (which should indeed be opposed) because I have never supported EVs but have instead always advocated returning to bicycles (which are also many times lighter (and hence require less energy to move around, duh!) than cars, whereas EVs are actually heavier than petrol/diesel cars on average:
). This is why only regressive environmentalism deserves to be taken seriously.
Quote
"Fracking may provide the cleanest, most environmentally friendly way to produce natural gas energy and harvest the domestic lithium we need for the green future endorsed by my colleagues on the extreme left."
It is no coincidence that the one and only one civilization in all of world history which discovered lithium:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#History
Quote
Petalite (LiAlSi4O10) was discovered in 1800 by the Brazilian chemist and statesman José Bonifácio de Andrada e Silva in a mine on the island of Utö, Sweden.[70][71][72][73] However, it was not until 1817 that Johan August Arfwedson, then working in the laboratory of the chemist Jöns Jakob Berzelius, detected the presence of a new element while analyzing petalite ore.[74][75][76][77] This element formed compounds similar to those of sodium and potassium, though its carbonate and hydroxide were less soluble in water and less alkaline.[78] Berzelius gave the alkaline material the name "lithion/lithina", from the Greek word λιθoς (transliterated as lithos, meaning "stone"), to reflect its discovery in a solid mineral, as opposed to potassium, which had been discovered in plant ashes, and sodium, which was known partly for its high abundance in animal blood. He named the new element "lithium".[9][72][77]
is the same one and only one civilization in world history which invented fracking:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fracking#History
Quote
On 24 April 1865, US Civil War veteran Col. Edward A. L. Roberts received a patent for an "exploding torpedo".[40] It was employed in Pennsylvania, New York, Kentucky, and West Virginia using liquid and also, later, solidified nitroglycerin. Later still the same method was applied to water and gas wells. Stimulation of wells with acid, instead of explosive fluids, was introduced in the 1930s. Due to acid etching, fractures would not close completely resulting in further productivity increase.[41]
The environment was in incomparably better condition prior to the discovery of lithium. So why would anyone think that lithium would be needed to counter environmental degradation? (Answer: because they are Westerners.)
More generally, the environment was in incomparably better condition prior to the Renaissance. So why would anyone think that any post-Renaissance knowledge would be needed to counter environmental degradation? (Answer: because they are Westerners.)
Homework: since the environment was in incomparably better condition back when there were 0 Western scientists in existence, what is the correct number of Western scientists that should exist in the future if we want to save the environment? (Bonus question: what is the fastest way to reach this number?)
Bacl to the first link, at least there are a few regressive environmentalists ridiculing progressive enviromentalists in the comments, for example:
Quote
There was a huge push 40 years ago to eliminate paper shopping bags for plastic because it was better for the environment. We'll see how this story unfolds and how long it takes to either fix it or stop making the problem worse.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: May 09, 2024, 08:07:08 pm »Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: May 03, 2024, 03:05:45 am »But AI is even worse:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aBNIekp4qY
As I keep saying, problems created by Western civilization cannot be solved by more Western civilization.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aBNIekp4qY
As I keep saying, problems created by Western civilization cannot be solved by more Western civilization.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: May 02, 2024, 11:30:43 pm »Posted by: rp
« on: May 02, 2024, 10:10:47 pm »
Western* men
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: April 05, 2024, 10:42:18 pm »
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 03, 2024, 02:22:16 am »Who takes environmentalism seriously?
End democracy and start ecofascism now!
End democracy and start ecofascism now!
Posted by: FakeOptimism
« on: November 05, 2023, 03:10:28 pm »No, Kurzgesagt, We WON'T Fix Climate Change - The Danger of Fake Optimism
Comments:
Alot of the people that will die come from parts of the world that had nothing to do with the creation of the climate crisis...
Quote
A rebuttal to Kurzgesagt's misleading video about 'staying hopeful' on climate change.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KQYNtPl7V4
Comments:
Quote
BadEmpanada
1 year ago (edited)
My original response to Kurzgesagt's comment (which is still somewhere down below) was auto-deleted by youtube. I'm reposting the original exchange here. YouTube keeps auto-deleting EVEN MY OWN COMMENTS on my channel.
Kurzgesagt's comment:
"Not going to reply to this video as you have made up your mind anyway (also ignored our 65 page source document with further reading https://sites.google.com/view/sources-can-we-fix-climate/).
Just wanted to comment on something wrong you said: We have no investors. Kurzgesagt is an independent channel and is almost entirely viewer funded. We do not rely on sponsors like Gates to keep the lights on. Although we have worked with them and other sponsors from time to time because it makes things safer, which is important if you want to pay your team fair wages. Kurzgesagt the sort of small business you should be rooting for.
You fundamentally get something wrong here: Pandering to the world view of a sponsor makes no sense if you consider the economics of it. While the Gates sponsorships were helpful, the amount we got over multiple years, is not that much if you need to pay 50 people (seriously, do the math). Gates Organizations payed us not nearly enough for us to do their bidding, or to motivate us to please them. For example, Brilliant alone (who also sponsored the video you criticized) funded us to a much, much larger degree than Gates, as did Skillshare or other organizations. But mainly, our viewers fund us through Patreon and our shop.
You don't understand the economics of small businesses or of channels with large teams on Youtube. If we wanted to sell out, this would be a really bad and inefficient way to do it. Crafting a deliberate propaganda piece with lies, sponsored by a Learning Website, just to please an organization that is currently not funding us is frankly conspiracy theory wackiness."
My response:
"You accuse me of making up my mind, but you've made up yours - you reiterate the same point as in the video. 'Doomerism is bad!' - it's really hardly even a thing, and you never demonstrate that it is much of one. Worse, there's not a single government in the world with the stance of 'climate change is real and caused by humans but we can't stop it so let's do nothing'. It is completely non-existent as a relevant political current, it has absolutely zero influence. So the video is underpinned by a strawman, which it then uses as an excuse to peddle fake optimism. Those who acknowledge the true extent of climate change which you gloss over are the ones doing the most to fight it - even imperfect groups like Extinction Rebellion engaging in direct action are heroes in comparison to a channel spreading the notion of 'the market'll fix it.'
Firstly, it's completely ridiculous that the single mention of your Gates Foundation 'grant' is what you chose to single out. The money you received from Gates was not mentioned until 53 minutes into a 66 minute video. You look at this single mention of this fact, which was intentionally (as stated in the video!) left until the conclusion to avoid muddying the waters, and dishonestly spin that into the idea that I'm peddling a conspiracy theory that Gates controls you. Even though in the video I mentioned NOTHING MORE than the idea that Gates gave you this money because the arguments presented in your videos are useful for protecting & furthering his interests, which is just uncontroversially true - that is why any individual or organization gives out no-questions-asked funding, because they think the receiver is doing something that they agree with. At no point was it ever even remotely implied that you made this video at the behest of Bill Gates, I am in fact 100% sure you didn't and made that clear in the video. This part of the video is actually just completely unimportant to its arguments and it would have practically been the same if I'd never even mentioned it. You focusing on this is a cop-out that is not only false, but you're using it to avoid addressing the actual arguments put forth in the video, instead trying to paint it as merely presenting a conspiracy theory.
I'm sure you have no 'investors', by the technical meaning of the term, *now*, but you absolutely had them earlier - they're what made your channel a viable enterprise in the first place. $600,000 goes a long way to building up a base. You can talk about the semantics of a 'grant' vs an 'investment', but functionally they're the same: someone like Bill Gates doesn't need to invest for profits, he needs to invest to influence policy. Investment (or a 'grant') in a YouTube channel that spreads the sorts of economic policies he supports is just as important to the performance of his portfolio as investment to gain a more direct profit. If I got a $600,000 investment I could turn my channel into a multi-million dollar enterprise within a few years, anyone can do it. You discounting it is reminscent of the classic Trump line 'just a small loan of a million dollars'. Most people could do a whole lot with a million dollars. I make these videos on $1,500 a month entirely alone, give me $600,000 and I can hire enough help to make an hour long video every week with 5x the quality, which will exponentionally increase channel growth over the course of 7 years (the time since your grant). Tell me that I don't know how to run a business all you want - but the reason I'm not getting the $$$ from monopolists like you to kickstart my channel is because my ideas won't make them money. You know 'how to run a business' in the sense that you know how to say things that appealed to the right people, that's really it. Me (one person) and your business actually make money in the exact same way, through making YouTube videos, so I understand it perfectly, thank you very much. You merely hire others to do most of the work for you, something which you can only do now due to the initial $$$ you had years ago.
As for how you have been influenced by Gates, why he funded you, etc? The way capitalist propaganda generally works, outside of the most direct organizations such as think-tanks, is through funding/hiring those who are already saying the sorts of things that benefit capitalists. So the reason you got your big funding windfall from Gates is because he liked what you were saying, he thought that it aligned with his overall goals which undeniably involve maintaining the very system that got him to where he is today. This creates a further incentive structure for you (or anyone else - I'm not just singling you out here) to continue to spread the same sorts of ideas. Gates may not have sponsored you any more than his 'small loan' of just $600,000, but others like him doubtlessly have since, and the audience which has already been primed to be inclined to such narratives through the hegemonic nature of this sort of propaganda just give you even more of an incentive to keep at it. It pays to tell people that the status quo is (mostly) fine, that the system can handle the problem. That's half true, the system could potentially handle the problem (and my proposed solutions here are actually entirely capitalist ones, since state companies and nationalizations have and do exist under capitalism. My proposals are New Deal style, not new innovations), but people like Gates are preventing us from doing so. Yet I don't think you'd ever get into that.
Feel free to prove me wrong in your follow-up video, that would be a very welcome surprise. It would be very important for a channel with 20 million subscribers to come out and advocate for nationalizations and public ownership of manufacturing to fight climate change.
BTW, you say I ignored your source document? No, I address it in the video, actually. And plopping up a bunch of sources in a disorderly fashion without even using them to support your argument is not a cop out. Do you see how I cite my sources IN THE VIDEO ITSELF? More of them than you, despite being one person on a shoestring budget? That's how you do it. Just putting a list of next to no context sources in a Google Doc without actually explaining how they fit into your overarching arguments and the points you're making is very dishonest, it's a way to say 'look at all these things that I say prove me right, when I don't actually explain how, yet which I curiously didn't actually put in the video itself.' Just saying 'I have sources' is also pretty useless against my response. I barely even contested the veracity of your individual statements, I contested how you utilise them. You might have a source that proves that light bulbs are becoming more efficient - and? Your argument was that this is a sign of progress towards fighting climate change, which is a massive logical leap from the actual fact. That's just one example but it is an accurate characterisation of how you utilised your sources here."
Quote
"Some will not survive" -Kurzgesagt
This line made me crack up. Total "some of you will die but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make" energy.
Quote
We called it inverse paranoia back in the 80s. "The pathological belief that everything will be fine."
Alot of the people that will die come from parts of the world that had nothing to do with the creation of the climate crisis...
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 15, 2023, 02:50:41 pm »Who is a better mayor: Adams ( https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/china-the-ocean-is-not-japan's-trash-can/msg18960/#msg18960 ) or Khan?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/no-meat-no-dairy-three-103814079.html
Still not enough, but at least better than all the Westerners who think the solution is in adding even more machines, such as the following specimen of Western inferiority:
I am going to start proudly calling myself a miserabilist from now on.
https://ochd.co.uk/db/ore/MobileCharacterPage.php?char=154001010
But back to Khan's superiority:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/no-meat-no-dairy-three-103814079.html
Quote
No meat, no dairy and three outfits a year: Welcome to Sadiq Khan’s plan for London
...
This is the radical vision of a net zero future dreamed up by C40, a global collective of city mayors chaired by Sadiq Khan, which advocates extreme measures to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and limit global temperature increases to 1.5C.
The Mayor of London is, of course, no stranger to pushing the dial on climate change. His unrelenting expansion of the Ulez ultra low emissions zone in August faced down major criticism from affected businesses, disadvantaged citizens and vigilante vandals.
Khan is showing no signs of slowing down: this week, plans were unveiled to lower the speed limit to 20mph on a further 40 miles of roads in London, the capital’s largest-ever rollout to date.
...
Citizens’ consumption habits were its central focus
...
Its more radical suggestions involved no less than: the abolition of private vehicles; the prohibition of meat and dairy consumption; the rationing of new items of clothing to three each per year; and the restriction of short-haul return flights to one every three years.
It also proposed slashing the use of steel and cement in construction
Still not enough, but at least better than all the Westerners who think the solution is in adding even more machines, such as the following specimen of Western inferiority:
Quote
“Fresh from imposing misery on motorists through his draconian Ulez expansion, Sadiq Khan appears to be conspiring new ways to make people’s lives miserable,” says Craig Mackinlay, the Tory MP who chairs the net zero scrutiny group in parliament.
“I’ve really had enough of this authoritarian, miserabilist approach to net zero. What we need is for technology and innovation to allow people to become more prosperous and greener at the same time; not poorer, colder and hungrier.”
I am going to start proudly calling myself a miserabilist from now on.
https://ochd.co.uk/db/ore/MobileCharacterPage.php?char=154001010
But back to Khan's superiority:
Quote
According to staff profiles on C40’s website, it employs 279 people outside of this management team, all of whom are subject to a stringent eco-friendly office regime. Internal staff documents ban the use of paper, even for note-taking and to-do lists, as well as printing using coloured ink or on just one side.
Flights and taxis can only be justified in “exceptional circumstances”, additional time off in lieu is given to staff who are forced to travel long distances by train instead, and conferences and events should aim to only provide vegetarian and vegan catering.
Posted by: antihellenistic
« on: August 09, 2023, 07:31:34 am »